From: dave.long@linaro.org (David Long)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v15 04/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 10:29:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57A89731.20709@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <74b8c503-b6df-dcb1-c278-d49850fe3715@linaro.org>
On 08/08/2016 07:13 AM, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 04/08/16 05:47, David Long wrote:
>> From b451caa1adaf1d03e08a44b5dad3fca31cebd97a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
>> Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 00:35:33 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH] arm64: Remove stack duplicating code from jprobes
>>
>> Because the arm64 calling standard allows stacked function arguments
>> to be
>> anywhere in the stack frame, do not attempt to duplicate the stack
>> frame for
>> jprobes handler functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> Documentation/kprobes.txt | 7 +++++++
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h | 2 --
>> arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c | 31 +++++--------------------------
>> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/kprobes.txt b/Documentation/kprobes.txt
>> index 1f9b3e2..bd01839 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/kprobes.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/kprobes.txt
>> @@ -103,6 +103,13 @@ Note that the probed function's args may be
>> passed on the stack
>> or in registers. The jprobe will work in either case, so long as the
>> handler's prototype matches that of the probed function.
>>
>> +Note that in some architectures (e.g.: arm64) the stack copy is not
>
> Could sparc64 be added to this list?
>
> For the sparc folks who are new to the thread, we've previously
> established that the sparc64 ABI passes large structures by
> allocating them from the caller's stack frame and passing a pointer
> to the stack frame (i.e. arguments may not be at top of the stack).
> We also noticed that sparc code does not save/restore anything from
> the stack.
>
I was reluctant to do that in the context of late changes to v4.8 for
arm64 but now that any changes for this are going in as a new patch it
would indeed be useful to get involvement from sparc maintainers.
>
>> +done, as the actual location of stacked parameters may be outside of
>> +a reasonable MAX_STACK_SIZE value and because that location cannot be
>> +determined by the jprobes code. In this case the jprobes user must be
>> +careful to make certain the calling signature of the function does
>> +not cause parameters to be passed on the stack.
>> +
>> 1.3 Return Probes
>>
>> 1.3.1 How Does a Return Probe Work?
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h
>> index 61b4915..1737aec 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h
>> @@ -22,7 +22,6 @@
>>
>> #define __ARCH_WANT_KPROBES_INSN_SLOT
>> #define MAX_INSN_SIZE 1
>> -#define MAX_STACK_SIZE 128
>>
>> #define flush_insn_slot(p) do { } while (0)
>> #define kretprobe_blacklist_size 0
>> @@ -47,7 +46,6 @@ struct kprobe_ctlblk {
>> struct prev_kprobe prev_kprobe;
>> struct kprobe_step_ctx ss_ctx;
>> struct pt_regs jprobe_saved_regs;
>> - char jprobes_stack[MAX_STACK_SIZE];
>> };
>>
>> void arch_remove_kprobe(struct kprobe *);
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
>> b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
>> index bf97685..c6b0f40 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
>> @@ -41,18 +41,6 @@ DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct kprobe_ctlblk, kprobe_ctlblk);
>> static void __kprobes
>> post_kprobe_handler(struct kprobe_ctlblk *, struct pt_regs *);
>>
>> -static inline unsigned long min_stack_size(unsigned long addr)
>> -{
>> - unsigned long size;
>> -
>> - if (on_irq_stack(addr, raw_smp_processor_id()))
>> - size = IRQ_STACK_PTR(raw_smp_processor_id()) - addr;
>> - else
>> - size = (unsigned long)current_thread_info() + THREAD_START_SP
>> - addr;
>> -
>> - return min(size, FIELD_SIZEOF(struct kprobe_ctlblk, jprobes_stack));
>> -}
>> -
>> static void __kprobes arch_prepare_ss_slot(struct kprobe *p)
>> {
>> /* prepare insn slot */
>> @@ -489,20 +477,15 @@ int __kprobes setjmp_pre_handler(struct kprobe
>> *p, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> {
>> struct jprobe *jp = container_of(p, struct jprobe, kp);
>> struct kprobe_ctlblk *kcb = get_kprobe_ctlblk();
>> - long stack_ptr = kernel_stack_pointer(regs);
>>
>> kcb->jprobe_saved_regs = *regs;
>> /*
>> - * As Linus pointed out, gcc assumes that the callee
>> - * owns the argument space and could overwrite it, e.g.
>> - * tailcall optimization. So, to be absolutely safe
>> - * we also save and restore enough stack bytes to cover
>> - * the argument area.
>> + * Since we can't be sure where in the stack frame "stacked"
>> + * pass-by-value arguments are stored we just don't try to
>> + * duplicate any of the stack.
> > ...
>> Do not use jprobes on functions
>> that
>> + * use more than 64 bytes (after padding each to an 8 byte boundary)
>> + * of arguments, or pass individual arguments larger than 16 bytes.
>
> I like this wording. So much so that it really would be great to repeat
> this in the Documentation/. Could this be included in the list of
> architecture support/restrictions?
>
Are you thinking specifically of the "5. Kprobes Features and
Limitations" section in Documentation/kprobes.txt?
>
> Daniel.
>
Thanks,
-dl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-08 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-08 16:35 [PATCH v15 00/10] arm64: Add kernel probes (kprobes) support David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 01/10] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature David Long
2016-07-15 10:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-15 14:51 ` David Long
2016-07-15 15:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-15 17:51 ` David Long
2016-07-19 14:17 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 02/10] arm64: Add more test functions to insn.c David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 03/10] arm64: add conditional instruction simulation support David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 04/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support David Long
2016-07-20 9:36 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-20 11:16 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-20 19:08 ` David Long
2016-07-21 8:44 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-20 15:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-21 14:50 ` David Long
2016-07-20 16:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-20 16:28 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-20 16:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-20 16:46 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-20 17:04 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-21 16:33 ` David Long
2016-07-21 17:16 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-21 17:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-21 18:33 ` David Long
2016-07-22 10:16 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-22 15:51 ` David Long
2016-07-25 17:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-25 22:27 ` David Long
2016-07-27 11:50 ` Daniel Thompson
2016-07-27 22:13 ` David Long
2016-07-28 14:40 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-29 9:01 ` Daniel Thompson
2016-08-04 4:47 ` David Long
2016-08-08 11:13 ` Daniel Thompson
2016-08-08 14:29 ` David Long [this message]
2016-08-08 22:49 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-08-09 17:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-08-10 20:41 ` David Long
2016-08-08 22:19 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-07-26 9:50 ` Daniel Thompson
2016-07-26 16:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-27 10:01 ` Dave Martin
2016-07-26 17:54 ` Mark Rutland
2016-07-27 11:19 ` Daniel Thompson
2016-07-27 11:38 ` Dave Martin
2016-07-27 11:42 ` Daniel Thompson
2016-07-27 13:38 ` Mark Rutland
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 05/10] arm64: Blacklist non-kprobe-able symbol David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 06/10] arm64: Treat all entry code as non-kprobe-able David Long
2016-07-15 16:47 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-19 0:53 ` David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 07/10] arm64: kprobes instruction simulation support David Long
2016-07-10 22:51 ` Paul Gortmaker
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 08/10] arm64: Add trampoline code for kretprobes David Long
2016-07-19 13:46 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-20 18:28 ` David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 09/10] arm64: Add kernel return probes support (kretprobes) David Long
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v15 10/10] kprobes: Add arm64 case in kprobe example module David Long
2016-07-14 16:22 ` [PATCH v15 00/10] arm64: Add kernel probes (kprobes) support Catalin Marinas
2016-07-14 17:09 ` William Cohen
2016-07-15 7:50 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-15 8:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-15 8:59 ` Alex Bennée
2016-07-15 9:04 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-15 9:53 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-14 17:56 ` David Long
2016-07-19 13:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-19 14:01 ` David Long
2016-07-19 18:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-07-19 19:38 ` David Long
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=57A89731.20709@linaro.org \
--to=dave.long@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).